Niels delestinne masterproef_tussentijdse_presentatie_april
Download as PPTX, PDF1 like633 views
This document provides an overview of the progress made on a thesis project developing a second screen application to enhance nature documentaries. It describes the development of several prototypes to test adding information blocks, allow users to select and rearrange video clips, and add remote control functionality. The latest prototype combines these features. Evaluations showed improved usability and scores over multiple iterations. Upcoming work includes a final evaluation and completing the thesis draft by mid-April.
Niels delestinne masterproef_tussentijdse_presentatie_april
- 1. Promoter: Prof. Dr. Ir. Erik Duval Mentor: Sven Charleer Niels Delestinne MSc in Applied Informatics nielsdelestinne.wordpress.com “Second screen” application for nature documentaries 01/04/2015
- 2. 1. Goal of this thesis 2. Recap 3. Progress (since last presentation) 4. Planning 5. Statistics 6. Demo Table of contents
- 3. T307: description With this thesis we investigate whether users can gain added value by using a second screen application when watching a nature documentary on TV. Design, develop and evaluate the impact on the user of (a) second screen application(s). Goal of this thesis
- 4. Research question / Problem definition Goal of this thesis Creating added value and increasing the interaction without negatively affecting the viewing experience.
- 5. 1. Goal of this thesis 2. Recap 3. Progress (since last presentation) 4. Planning 5. Statistics 6. Demo Table of contents
- 6. Prototype 1 Main ideas • Synchronization with a Planet Earth episode. • Receive information-blocks while watching an episode. • The information should be related to what is shown on the episode, but also unseen / new. • Rewatch information-blocks from previously watched episodes. Recap
- 7. Prototype 1: V1 • Started out with sketches on paper. • Helped to decide which features were (not) useful. Recap
- 8. Recap Prototype 1: V2 • In an effort to make the evaluation a more realistic experience for the participants, InVision was used to create a semi-digital prototype. • Buttons • Swipe & Touch • Timed screen changes • Viewable on a tablet • For the same reason, GIF animations were added.
- 12. Recap Prototype 1: V3 • 100% digital prototype • Native Android application • Fully synchronized • Few elements hard coded • Data dynamically loaded and displayed from database
- 16. Prototype 1: V2 Evaluation results Evaluating the usability and usefulness was the main goal of this evaluation. 5 participants: ranging from 20 to 23 years old. Average SUS of 73: the lowest being 60, the highest 87,5 Recap Prototype 1: V3 Evaluation results The Main goal of this evaluation was to check the usability, usefulness and aesthetic qualities of the prototype. 5 participants: ranging from 20 to 56 years old. Average SUS of 82,5 the lowest being 77,5 the highest 92,5
- 17. 1. Goal of this thesis 2. Recap 3. Progress (since last presentation) 4. Planning 5. Statistics 6. Demo Table of contents
- 18. Progress Feedback from last presentation • Remark “And what about communicating from the tablet to the TV?” • Had me thinking • What is typical for nature documentaries? • A new idea was born!
- 19. Prototype 2 Main ideas • Fragmentize the documentary • Let the user decide what he wants to see • Increase control / interaction • Instead of only consuming, allow “producing” Progress
- 20. Progress Prototype 2: V1 • Paper prototype • 2 modes • Mode 1“Live viewing mode” • Documentary starts playing • Different fragments are tracked & shown • User can skip to other fragments • Mode 2 “Storyboard mode” • User selects a set of fragments (creates a storyboard) • User plays the selected fragments
- 21. Progress Prototype 2: V1 Mode 1“Live viewing mode”
- 22. Progress Prototype 2: V1 Mode 2 “Storyboard mode” • Drag & drop • Multiple select
- 23. Progress Prototype 2: V1 Mode 2 “Storyboard mode” • Drag & drop • Multiple select
- 24. Progress Prototype 2: V1 Evaluation results Focus on usability. The participants were asked to perform certain tasks which were described in a scenario. Both modes were evaluated. 5 participants: ranging from 20 to 56 years old. Mode 1 Average SUS of 76: the lowest being 60, the highest 87,5 Mode 2 Average SUS of 91,5: the lowest being 87,5, the highest 92,5 76 91.5 AVG SUS MODE 1 AVG SUS MODE 2
- 25. Progress Prototype 2: V2 • Digital prototype • “Storyboard” mode extended with functionality of the “live viewing” mode • Create a storyboard using multiple select • TV-prototype
- 26. Progress Prototype 2: V2 TV-prototype Realistic setting for evaluation means more reliable feedback Creation of TV-prototype • Amazon web services • S3 • SNS • SQS • RTMP Streaming server (Cloudfront) • JWplayer • Javascript / AJAX • PHP
- 27. Prototype 2: V2 Core functionalities Select fragments in the order you want / create a storyboard Progress Remove fragments from the storyboard Play the created storyboard Keep track of your selected fragments while your storyboard is playing on TV View which fragment of your storyboard is currently playing Fully synchronized with the TV-prototype
- 30. Prototype 2: V2 Evaluation results The Main goal of this evaluation was to check the usability, usefulness and aesthetic qualities of the prototype. 5 participants: ranging from 19 to 55 years old. Average SUS of 92 the lowest being 87,5the highest 95 Progress 91.5 92 AVG SUS PROTOTYPE 2 - V1 AVG SUS PROTOTYPE 2 - V2
- 31. Progress Prototype 2: V3 • More interaction, “means of control” required • Implementing “TV-remote functionality” • Required to update the second-screen prototype as well as the TV-prototype
- 32. Prototype 2: V3 Core functionalities Play / pause a fragment Progress Next / previous fragment Configure, update your storyboard Mute / unmute the audio Adjust the volume Complete synchronization between second- screen prototype and TV-prototype
- 33. Prototype 2: V3 The control-bar All new functionalities are grouped inside the control- bar Progress
- 34. Prototype 2: V3 Evaluation results The Main goal of this evaluation was to check the usability, usefulness and aesthetic qualities of the prototype and to check if the new functionalities were well received. 5 participants: ranging from 20 to 56 years old. Average SUS of 90 the lowest being 85the highest 95 Progress 91.5 92 90 AVG SUS PROTOTYPE 2 - V1 AVG SUS PROTOTYPE 2 - V2 AVG SUS PROTOTYPE 2 - V3
- 35. Prototype 3 Main idea • Combine the information-blocks from prototype 1 with the fragmentation & control functionality of prototype 2. • Consume & produce Motivation • Create an overall better application • Eliminate problems with prototype 1 • E.g. distraction Progress
- 37. The demo will feature this prototype
- 38. Progress Overview of the prototypes Prototype 1 V1 Prototype 1 V2 Prototype 2 V1 Prototype 2 V2 Prototype 2 V3 Prototype 3 V1 Prototype 1 V3
- 39. 1. Goal of this thesis 2. Recap 3. Progress (since last presentation) 4. Planning 5. Statistics 6. Demo Table of contents
- 40. 6 JUN22 MAY 14 APR – 22 MAY Now - 14 APR Hand in thesis.Writing and finishing draft thesis-text. Hand in draft thesis-text.Preparing evaluation of final prototype (3: V1). Evaluating prototype 3: V1. Process results of evaluation. Planning
- 41. END OF JUN Defending the thesis.
- 42. 1. Goal of this thesis 2. Recap 3. Progress (since last presentation) 4. Planning 5. Statistics 6. Demo Table of contents
- 43. Blog posts created. Reactions made by me Statistics The Wordpress statistics 40 63
- 44. Hours worked, and counting. Statistics The Toggl statistics Very accurately tracked the time Which is 213 hours more compared to last time. 355
- 46. Demo
- 47. Questions?